ARTICLE
4 August 2026

Intellectual Property Report

BB
Baker Botts LLP

Contributor

Baker Botts is a leading global law firm. The foundation for our differentiated client support rests on our deep business acumen and technical experience built over decades of focused leadership in our sectors and practices. For more information, please visit bakerbotts.com.
The EU AI Act has entered its implementation phase with significant timeline adjustments and compliance requirements for companies deploying artificial intelligence systems. Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Hikma v. Amarin reshapes patent enforcement strategy, particularly for induced infringement claims across industries.
European Union Intellectual Property
Baker Botts’s articles from Baker Botts LLP are most popular:
  • with readers working within the Insurance industries
Baker Botts LLP are most popular:
  • within Real Estate and Construction topic(s)

EU’s AI Rulebook is Coming for Your Operations—Here’s What it Means

Samir Bhavsar

Over the past two years, energy companies have moved quickly to embed artificial intelligence (AI) across their operations, including predictive maintenance on compressor stations, automated leak detection on pipelines, reservoir modeling and offshore safety monitoring.

In many cases, it is already delivering measurable operational value. But a regulatory framework born in Brussels is about to change the legal exposure of any operator with exposure to the European Union (EU) market.

The EU AI Act, which entered into force in August 2024, is the world’s first comprehensive legal framework governing AI. It carries penalties of up to 35 million euros or 7% of global annual turnover, whichever is higher, for the most serious violations. For energy companies, the act’s risk-based classification system means that many AI systems already embedded in daily operations could trigger significant compliance obligations.

Continue Reading

The Supreme Court's Decision in 'Hikma v. Amarin' and What it May Mean for Patent Enforcement Strategy 

Robert Maier, Daniel Chung (Summer Associate)

On June 4, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., No. 24-889 (Hikma v. Amarin) that may reshape the landscape for generic manufacturers marketing products under so-called "skinny labels"- and beyond that, which may have broader implications for induced infringement claims in patent cases of all kinds. The decision provides additional clarity and context regarding the line between lawful product marketing and actionable inducement, with implications that extend well beyond the pharmaceutical industry to any context in which a product is capable of both patented and unpatented uses.

Continue Reading

Our Take on AI: August 2026

EU AI Act Timeline Reset: The Council of the European Union has given final approval to a targeted package of amendments to the EU AI Act as part of the "Omnibus VII" simplification agenda, moving the Act from framework-setting into implementation. The headline change is timing: key obligations for high-risk AI systems are deferred, with new application dates of December 2027 for stand-alone systems and August 2028 for systems integrated into products. Notably for content-driven businesses, the amendments cut the other direction on disclosure — transparency deadlines for AI-generated content are accelerated, and regulatory sandbox timelines are adjusted to align with implementation realities. The risk-based architecture remains intact, making this a recalibration rather than a rollback. Samir Bhavsar writes more about this development here: "EU AI Act Reset: More Time, Same Compliance Reality.”

July 2026 Intellectual Property Report Recap

In case you missed it, here is a link to our July 2026 Intellectual Property Report.

Baker Botts Intellectual Property Department Update

Kathleen Fox Murphy has joined Baker Botts as an Intellectual Property partner in London. During more than 25 years in practice, she has represented life sciences and technology companies in patent disputes before the UK High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court and has helped clients navigate proceedings before the Unified Patent Court. Her work includes pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medical device and telecommunications disputes, as well as interim injunctions and competition law issues involving standard essential patents and FRAND licensing. Kathleen is another point of connection between Baker Botts' US intellectual property practice and patent proceedings in the UK and Europe.

Continue Reading

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More